Expense Ratio Rating
6 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
4 /10
Category Score
8 /10
Market Size
4 /10
$BAFAX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 643 US Stocks Large Growth funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- gwpax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
American Funds Growth Portfolio Class A
Expenses: 0.40% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- fmfmx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Fidelity Advisor® Series Equity Growth Fund
Expenses: 0.01% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- mgk
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Vanguard Mega Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
Expenses: 0.07% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- fumix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Fidelity® SAI U.S. Momentum Index Fund
Expenses: 0.15% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- agthx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
American Funds The Growth Fund of America® Class A
Expenses: 0.63% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- iwy
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
iShares Russell Top 200 Growth ETF
Expenses: 0.20% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- frlg
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Large Cap Growth Index-Linked ETN due 2028
Expenses: 0.65% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- jraix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Janus Henderson Research Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.62% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- faofx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Fidelity Advisor® Series Growth Opportunities Fund
Expenses: 0.01% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »